PERSONAL EXPLANATION 



REMARKS 



OF 



HON. ELISHA D. CULLEN, 



OF DELAWARE, 



[N THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, AUGUST 4, 1856, 



ON 



THE NEXT PRESIDENCY. 



THE HOUSE BEING IN COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON THE STATE OE THE UNION. 



WASHINGTON : 

PRINTED AT THE CONGRESSIONAL GLODE OFFICE. 

1856. 



PERSONAL EXPLANATION. 



The House being in the Committee of the Who],' on tiic , 
state of the Union — 

Mr. CULLEX said : I find in a newspaper 
called the Savannah Republican of July 29, 
1S56, a paper published in Savannah, Georgia, 
what purports to be a speech of the gentleman 
front Georgia, [Mr. Cobb,] made to a portion of 
his constituents on the occasion of a recent visit 
to his homo. Among other things in that speech 
1 find the following, to which I especially wish 
to call the attention of that gentleman: 

•• Mr. Oobb pretended to discuss the chums of the several 
candidates lor the Presidency and their respective prospi cts 
of success : how well he succeeded I Will endeavor i" eh- 
able you to gather from a synopsis of lu~ speech, so far as 
1 can relate from memory. 

''After a few general remarks by way of introduction, 
be charged upon the American party the folly of thinking 
to elect Mr. Fillmore by throwing that election into the | 
House; Cor. said he, the record stands thus: it requires 
sixteen States to elect; .Mr. Fremont has thirteen of the 

northern ami western States, without a doubt ; Illinois ami 
Iowa, by some recent action in Congress, have demon- 
strated where they stand— this gives Mr. Fremont fifteen 
I he wants but one to elect him, and that one ho has 
in Delaware. Who lias but one Representative in Congress, 
and be has never failed to vote with the Black Republicans 
in every trying issue, ami in fact it was his vote placed 
Banks in the Speaker's chair. 
■• Allowing, saiil he. Cor argument sake, thai Mr. Fillmore 

gets four south. tii States, what will that avail without 

strong backing at the North • But be will not get a single 
northern State. Mr. Buchanan, ho continued, will obtain 

the strength of the southern vote, though by no moans sul- 
ti.-ont to elect him ; and the n quickly vaulting to the lark 
of that old Democratic bobby, the speaker urged the 
American party, if they would not see an Abolitionisl Pn a 
ident, to drop Sir. Fillmore, and unite u ith them in electing 
Mr. Buchanan by the voice of the people," 

I ask the gentleman from Georgia whether 
those words, or the substance of them, were tit 
tered by him upon the occasion referred to ? 

Mr. COBB, of Georgia. I have never been in 
the habit of noticing these accounts given in polit- 
ical papers of any speeches I make either here j 
or before the people in public assemblies. I never 
have, during the time I have served as a member 
of Congress, asked the privilege of making a per- 
sonal explanation, and I never shall in all proba- i 



Mlity. These reports of our speeches are imper- 
fect, and incorrect often, even when made here- 
by competent reporters; but when made by tl. 
who profess — tis this correspondent does — to 
give the substance of speeches from memory, it 
not unfreouently happens, both with your polit- 
ical friends and your political opponents, that 
they misunderstand, and sometimes misrepfe 
what you have said. 

Now, in order that I may place this matter 
right before the gentleman from Delaware, and 
before the country, it is proper that I should stall 
— not repeat the argument I then made — but that 
I should state the point which I was urging be- 
fore the people in the address I delivered, w le 
I recently visited my home. The position which 
I took before the people there was this: that it 
was dangerous to the interests and rights of our 
section of the country to throw the election of 
President into the House of Representatives; that 
in my judgment the result of bringing the elec- 
tion into the House of Representatives would b? 
the election of Fremont. I based that opinion 
upon this calculation: it required sixteen States 
to elect; thirteen States were represented by a 
majority of Mr. Fremont's friends upon this 
floor. I did not state that Illinois and Iowa had, 
by recent action of the House, exhibited where 
tiny stood; and I allude to this as one evidi 
that this reporter did not understand the argument 
which I was offering. But I stated that, by the 
recent action of the House, on the day before I 
left for my home, Mr. Allen, of Illinois, had been 
turned out of his seat; that if his seat was filled 
by a Republican, and if a Republican was elected 
from the district represented by Mr. Trumbull — 
which district had given him two or three thou- 
sand majority — it would give the State of Illinois 
to Fremont. That would give him fourteen States. 
I stated that the State of Iowa was represented 
by a Democrat and a Republican; that Mr. II am. 
had been elected a year previous to the assem- 
bling of this Congress, and that, as I was in- 
formed, since the present session of Congress, 
Mr. Hall's seat had been contested, and would 



not probably be acted upon during the present 
session of Congress, but would go over until the 
next session of Congress, when the presidential 
election was over; and if Mr. Hall, by the same 
majority which turned out Mr. Allen, was turned 
out of his seat, the vote of Iowa would be given 
10 Fremont also, which would give him fifteen 
States; that that result would place the presi- j 
dential election in the House in the hands and 
in the power of the gentleman from Delaware, 
and that I was unwilling to trust that power there. 
I therefore called upon the people of my State not 
to give a vote by which the presidential election 
would be thrown into the House of Representa- 
tives, and would be dependent upon the vote of 
the gentleman from Delaware. I did not state 
that the gentleman from Delaware had voted 
with the Black Republicans upon all these ques- 
tions and issues, which is the point to which he 
takes exception, and to which he would very 
properly and justly take exception if 1 had so 
stated. 

I commented upon two votes given by the gen- 
tleman from Delaware. One was on the Speaker's 
election. I urged, with warmth and earnestness 
before the people of that neighborhood, that at a 
time when the whole South, without reference to 
divisions of party, felt that their rights, and their 
interests, and their safety, were to be placed in 
jeopardy by the organization of this House being 
given into the hands of a political party, purely 
sectional in its character, and based upon hos- 
tility to the rights and interests of the South — that 
when the South with one united voice (with two 
solitary exceptions) cast their votes for a Demo- 
crat, although not the candidate of the Demo- 
cratic party" by caucus nomination, the gentle- 
man from Delaware had resisted all the appeals 
made to him by his friends, that he had resisted 
the appeals which the South, by her interest in 
'hat election, made to him; he, rather than give 
his support to a Democrat — rather than vote for 
Mr. Aiken, had thrown away his vote, and 
allowed the present Speaker of this House to be 
elected as the representative of the same party 
which is now urging the claims of Mr. Fremont 
for the Presidency. On that 1 based the argument 
and appeal which 1 made to my people, that, in 
my judgment, the gentleman from Delaware — if 
he election came into the House of Representa- 
tives — could, under no circumstances, be induced 
to give his vote to Mr. Buchanan. I endeavored 
to show the people that Mr. Fillmore never would 
be elected before the people; that before the 
House he stood no chance of election; that the 
issue was between Buchanan and Fremont; and 
that the gentleman from Delaware, by his vote in 
the Speakership election, had given evidence, 
satisfactory and conclusive to my own mind, 
•hat whatever danger might imperil the South 
from the success of Mr. Fremont, that same 
danger, in my judgment, had imperiled our in- 
terests in the success of Mr. Banks as Speaker; 
that the gentleman from Delaware bad resisted 
the appeals in one case, and would resist them 
in the other. I believe the gentleman from Dela- 
ware will not now say that he would not. I 
would not do him injustice; but I declare it is my 
fixed conviction, that he would not, under any 
circumstances, give his vote to Mr. Buchanan. 
The other vote to which I alluded as having 



been given by the gentleman from Delaware is 
not referred to by that-correspondent. But, sir, 
as I have discovered since my return that I 
did him injustice in the reference to that other 
vote, although his attention has not been called 
to it by that article, I feel it due to him and to 
myself that I should now refer to it, in order that, 
when these remarks reach the people whom I 
addressed on that occasion, any impression made 
by these previous remarks may be removed. I 
refer to another trying and exciting issue , in which 
the people of the South felt so deep and keen an 
interest — the one growing out of the motion to 
expel Mr. Brooks; and I stated that the gentle- 
man, from Delaware had voted for the expulsion 
of Mr. Brooks. I made that statement because 
the gentleman from Delaware had, on the inves- 
tigation of this matter, risen and stated to the 
House that he had changed his opinion on the 
subject, and he made a very able defense and 
argument on behalf of Mr. Edmundson. I con- 
cluded that he intended to vote for the other res- 
olution against Mr. Brooks and Mr. Keitt. 
The remark was frequently made, that only one 
gentleman from the South had voted for that res- 
olution; and the impression was made on my 
mind, as upon the minds of others, that that vote 
was given by the gentleman from Delaware. But, 
as he has stated to me that I was not correct in 
that matter, I desire to correct myself by saying 
that he did not vote at all on the resolutions as to 
the expulsion of Mr. Brooks, but voted for the 
resolution censuring Mr. Keitt, and voted against 
the resolution censuring Mr. Edmundson. 

I have given the points which I made in that 
speech; and, if it were proper, I would go through 
with the same argument here for the whole country 
as I made for the people of my own town on 
the subject. I will close by repeating the firm 
conviction of my judgment, that the people who 
desire the defeat of Mr. Fremont for the Presi- 
dency ought to see to it that the election does not 
1 come to the House of Representatives. 

Mr. CULLEN. I am very much gratified at the 
I statement made by the gentleman from Georgia, 
1 and at his admission that he had done me injustice 
in the remarks which he had made on the evening 
' in question in Athens, in the State of Georgia. 
!I must say, Mr. Chairman, in regard to that 
j matter, that the honorable gentleman had no 
grounds on which he could infer that my vote 
: would be for Fremont in the presidential election, 
! in case it should come into the House of Repre- 
sentatives. He could draw no such conclusion 
; from anything that I had previously said or done. 
| as that I would vote for Mr. Fremont. Such a 
contingency,, sir, never once entered my mind, 
! until I saw that report of the gentleman's speech. 
Did I come here as a Democrat? No, sir, but 
against the will and vote of every Democrat in 
■ the State of Delaware, with the exception of some 
half dozen or dozen votes of my personal friends. 
I Did they send me here to support Democracy? 
Did that large and respectable party, which is 
the predominant party in that State, send me 
here to support Democratic principles, when they 
knew that I had long since turned my back upon 
them, had abandoned them, had left them, and 
gone from them forever? No, sir; and even 
the very individuals— from among my personal 
friends— of the Democratic party who supported 



me, if they had believed thai I could ev< r betray 
the confidence reposed in me, and that I, holding 
myself up to the world as an American) could 
come here and lay aside Americanism and sup- 
port Democracy, they, instead of supporting 
me, would have pointed at me the finger of scorn 
and contempt. No honorable man would ever 
support one who had held himself up to the « orld 
as one thing, and then — after confidence : 
reposed in him — bad betrayed thai confidence, 
had turned traitor to bis professed principles, 
and had disgraced those who had elected him. 
I came here with no prejudice against individuals 
oft he Democratic party, with no prejudice against 
individuals of the Republican party. 1 did nut 
know what the views of the Inter were. I knew 
nothing of the views of the American | 
further than had been elicited in my own State, 
and at those m< i tings in winch their proceedings 
had been made public, and which I read in the 
public prints. 1 supposed n to be a national 
party — that it was truly a national party. I 
joined it as a national party; [came here as a 
national man. I sal lure ready to vote for any 
man who was a national man. without regard to 
his Democracy or Whiggery. I cared not what 

his antecedents were: if he were a true man; if 
he were a man who loved this Union; ifhe were 
a man who would support the Constitution — a 
man who loves his country, a man of right char- 
acter and true principles, and competent for the 
station — whether Democratic or Whig, or what- 
ever might have bet n his antecedents — he would 
have received my vote as against any other man 
whom I did not know to be national and attached 
to the Constitution of the country. And such 
wele my feelings until the meeting of the seventy- 
four Democrats, so celebrated at Che commence- 
ment of the present session, when they went into 
caucus, and passed one of the mo*t offensive 
resolutions that possibly could have been d< - 
vised, especially holding up the American party 
to scorn and contempt. 1 saw that resolution, 
and I felt from my heart that it was a lib< 1 upon 
us. I felt indignant that such an imputation 
should have been cast upon the party of which I 
was a member. 1 felt that the American party 
did not deserve it. Hut they did not stop there. 
A few days after, the gentleman from Georgia 
[Mr. Cobb] rose in his place in this House, 
and made a speech, in winch he took great ex- 
ceptions to some of the principles held by the 
American party. He said something about hor- 
rible oaths and obligations taken by the men 
of that party. Another gentleman — the gi ntle- 
ileman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. Johes,] also 
made a speech, to which 1 felt that I had the 
right to take exceptions. The honorable gentle- 
man from Alabama, from the Mobile district. 
[Mr. Wai.klk,] a member of the American party, 
made a proposition, pending the election of the 
Speaker of tins House, to meet the Democratic 
party in caucus in this Hall to nominate a candi- 
date, and that both the American. and the Demo- 
cratic parties should unite in electing him. To this 
proposition everyraember of the American parly 
was willing to accede. How was that proposition 
met by the Democratic party in the Hi 
" No, said the gentleman from Pennsylvania, 
" we cannot receive you. If you come into cau- 
cus with us, you must come to us as Democrats. 



We will receive you in soother way." Sir, tl" 

words had scarcely passed ft his lips bi 

they went to my heart, and I resolved that I 
would nevei vote for the Democratic candidate 
for Sp< iki r of this H Sii . 1 know of no 

i in K distinctions in p irtit i as tins. Is one party 
so much above the other, so much more honor- 
able, or mora n >pi c table, as i" r< quire 'be oth< r 
to acknowledge us inferiority before it will be 

'■ allowed i.i unite with tin in - I do not so under- 
stand it. I did not so understand gentlemen who 
were connected with the American party, that 

they would SO degl IvCS, that tiny 

Would take upon tlielnsii. 

tions, or would make disn ■•■ '■ dg- 

ments for the i with the Democratic 

party. Some line- after" tins it v. is rumor, d about 

i he House that the Am< ricans were going to vote 
me candid it for Speaker. I felt 
some concern, some on. I in- 

quired of a number of gentli men- - 1 lemoi 
to know if this waa so. Doubtless, they 
was. I then went to gentlemen of the Am 

party, and askl d whether it Were so, ami 

was the unanimous response. Well, sii 
after I obtained the floor, and declared to the 
House that 1 would vote for no man for Speaker 
■I been in that Democr ii ind had 

VOtt d for the resolutions adoptl d by that caucus, 
v one who approved of 'tains, 

or of tie' remarks of the gentlemen from Georgia 

and Pennsylvania, to \\ Inch 1 have ri I 

After the speech made'byihe gentleman from 

Georgia, and the speech made by the gi ntleman 

from Pennsylvania, I n s >Iv< d, 

that I would never vote for any man for £ 

of this House ^pjho had voted tor these rcsolu- 

approved theni. 1 h( Id to thai i 

to the end of the contest, and I looked upon i; as 
one of the highest honors ever conferred upon 
me to meet the approving smiles of my co 
uiits, when [returned home, saying to me, " Well 

ood and faithful si rvant, you ha\ 
but your principles; you have done what we 

would have had you do!" This was tin- r 

which I everywhere met with when 1 returned 
home. My constituents wei I at the 

course I had taken. Yes, sir, and more 'ban two 
thirds of the Democrats in my State, I h 
son t,, believe, approved the course 1 had 
They said, electee, as I had b ricans, 

I could not have done otherwise. 

Where does the -ell t le Ilia II g, t tin'' obligation* 

w bich . 1 was under to voti for Mr. Liken. 3 
Were tie ible, or moral '■ 

How did they arise? I deny that I was under 
any obligations to vol" for any nominee or can- 
didate of the I kemocratic party. I had tl 
to vote fur whom I pleased; but it was my duty 
to vote I'm- lie- nomim e of my o\i n p nty. I was 
satisfied with him. d the distinguished 

gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. I- 
and voted for him from first to last. I voted for 
htm for a wei k or ten days a knew 

him by sight. Hi- frequently passed me. and I 
did nol know that he was the candidate for whom 
I was voting. 

Now, sir, the honoral 
gia says- that the Representative from I' 
was the cause 6f the election of Mr. Kim,-. 
Sir, I not only say that the Represi ntative from 



(> 



Delaware was not the cause, either directly or 
indirectly, of the election of Mr. Banks, but I 
say that the Democratic party in this House were 
indirectly the cause of his election, and how? 
By the Constitution of the country a majority 
was required to elect. We were acting under the 
rule of that Constitution. Well, sir, after the 
plurality rule had been introduced and voted on 
time after time, I ask the gentleman from Geor- 
gia to look over the record, and he will find that 
in not one single instance did the Representative 
from Delaware vote for that rule. I state to that 
gentleman that I would have voted against that 
rule to this day. How, then, was Mr. Banks 
elected ? The American party voted against that 
rule. That rule was adopted by the votes of the 
Democratic and of the Republican parties, and 
not by the votes of the American party. 

After the plurality rule had been adopted, was 
it not evident to all who was to be the Speaker ? 
It was easy to see when the plurality rule was 
adopted what was going to be the result. But 
the plurality rule was adopted, and the ballotings 
provided for under it were taken, and upon the 
last ballot, when Mr. Banks was elected, the 
name of the Representative from Delaware, with 
five others, stands recorded for Hen ryM. Fuller. 
I believed then that it was my duty to vote as I 
did. I believe it now. 

But now, the honorable gentleman from Geor- 
gia says that he believes i would vote for Mr. 
Fremont. Well, sir, how did I vote in the contest 
for Speaker? I remained true and faithful to my 
party. I voted with them from first to last. Sir, 
my party have nominated Mr. Fillmore, of New 
York, as their candidate for the Presidency. I ap- 
prove of the nomination. I give*he nominee my 
support; and I will say to the gentleman from 
Georgia that I will vote for him if the election 
comes to this House; and I can join with the gen- 
ii' man in saying that my hope is that the election 
may be settled by the people, and that it may not 
come to this House. But, if God, in his provi- 
dence, so orders that it shall be brought here and 
decided by this House, I trust 1 shall do my duty 
then as I did it in the contest for the election of 
Speaker. I will vote for Mr. Fillmore on the first, 
on the second, on the third, and on the last bal- 
lot, and on every ballot. I will not look to con- 
tingencies to say whether I would vote for either 
Mr. Buchanan or Mr. Fremont. What connec- 
tion is there between them and myself? I am not 
the partisan of either of them. 1 have no con- 
nection with either of them. They were not 
nominated by me, nor by my political party. I 
may have a feeling of preference between them, 
but it is my duty to make no choice. I take the 
course which I believe to be that of an honest 
man. The pathway of duty is the path of safety. 
It becomi s an honest man to act well his part, to 
be faithful and true, and to leave all consequences 
to Qddi who can overrule them at his will and 



pleasure. That is my determination. I intend 
to perform my duty. I will, if God spares my 
life and faculties, vote truly and faithfully for 
Millard Fillmore from first to last, if the election 
comes into this House; and I will not vote for 
Mr. Buchanan, or for Mr. Fremont. I have no 
choice between them. Here is a plain road for 
me to travel. Shall I go away from that road? 
Shall my way be tortuous and winding ? Shall I 
raise up difficulties for the purpose of encounter- 
ing them? No, sir; there are no difficulties in 
my path. My constituents are for Mr. Fillmore. 
All my party go for him in a mass. Some months 
ago, I thought otherwise. I gave up the State of 
Delaware as lost. Recent information, however, 
enables me to say that that old Commonwealth 
will go for Millard Fillmore. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, I will ask by what kind 
of morality the honorable gentleman from Georgia 
will ask an American to abandon his candidate 
and resort to Mr. Buchanan? Would such a 
course be honorable ? He says that Mr. Fillmore 
cannot be elected. He cannot be elected if no- 
body will vote for him. It is the duty of every 
man to vote right, remembering his duty, and 
not concern himself about others. I believe — 
my opinion may not be entitled to much weight — 
but I do as firmly believe as I do in my existence, 
that if the presidential election is settled in this 
House, the decision will, the House voting by 
States, be in favor of Mr. Fillmore. I do not pro- 
fess to be a prophet, but I believe as I have said. 
It may be remarked that the wish is father to 
the thought. So it may be. But that will not 
excuse me, whether he can be elected or not, for 
the non-performance of my duty. It is my duty 
to vote for the nominee of my party. I ha^ve 
never, in word or deed, expressed anything to 
the contrary. But it is not my intention to make 
any declaration in regard to a preference between 
Mr. Buchanan and Mr. Fremont. I cannot con- 
ceive of a case in which I can be called on to de- 
cide between them. If the three presidential candi- 
dates are returned to this House, I cannot conceive 
of any case, supposing them all to be living, in 
which I shall be justified, as a man of honor, in 
abandoning my nominee and voting for another. 
I can foresee no such contingency. Until I do, I 
will make no choice as between Buchanan and 
Fremont. I leave that for others. I may have a 

F reference, but that preference I shall not express, 
shall not express it by my vote. 

I have said all I wish to say on that subject, 
and matters connected with it. I hope my pro- 
spective vote may not again be made the subject of 
another speech. Whether it is or not, I will say 
that neithercoaxing, nor bribery, nor threats, will 
move me from my course. 

If God spares my life and faculties, I will un- 
questionably give my vote as I have indicated. L 
shall do my duty in that respect cheerfully and 
faithfully, leaving consequences to God. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRF^c: 

Ifllli 

o wil 897 902 3 | 



